On Mon, Apr 02, 2007 at 08:58:50AM -0700, Brendan Cully wrote: > > I'd personally like to take a look at these, but I won't have time > > until later in the week... What bug number(s) are the SSHFS/VFAT > > bugs? (or, I can just search for them when I get the chance...) > > I don't think they have bugs filed. I just noticed them following some > messages back from mutt-dev to mutt-users. Ah. That will make them harder to find... Do you happen to have a link handy? If not I can search, of course... > > Would it be worthwhile to create a separate list for (potential) > > security issues related to Mutt? > Maybe. But aside from my recent BTS spam and some very long threads > about PATH which you may have seen, mutt-dev is often fairly > calm. Heh. Yes, but these days it's been pretty busy, with all the changes you've checked in, even without those threads. A lot of this stuff could be considered relatively low priority, which a lot of people might not care about. But security bugs are always higher priority, and perhaps some people who might not care about the dev process overall might be interested in security-related issues. It was just a thought... If nothing else, perhaps those handling bug reports could add "SECURITY" to the subject line, to make them easy to filter on? OK, I've caused enough damage for one day. Back to my regularly-scheduled drudgery... :) -- Derek D. Martin http://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02 -=-=-=-=- This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in undeliverable mail. Sorry for the inconvenience. Thank the spammers.
Description: PGP signature